@spspnews.bsky.social @psychscience.bsky.social @ispp-pops.bsky.social

#SocialPsych #PsychSciSky #PoliticalPsychology #ISPP #PolPsych #AcademicSky

This research highlights a central paradox: people do not merely endure inequality—they interpret it, justify it, and at times deny it. For disadvantaged individuals, system-justifying beliefs may serve as psychological safeguards, lowering perceptions of discrimination and fostering a sense of coherence. Yet this comfort often comes at a cost: it can dull the moral outrage needed to challenge systemic injustice and drive collective change. Understanding this duality is essential for scholars and policymakers alike. Ultimately, the divergent predictors of perceived discrimination by gender and ethnicity reflect not only structural disparities, but also the symbolic frameworks through which individuals make sense of justice. Only by attending to both material and recognition-based dimensions of inequality can a fuller understanding—and eventual transformation—of the psychological landscape of social stratification be achieved.

"Yet this comfort often comes at a cost: it can dull the moral outrage needed to challenge systemic injustice and drive collective change."

#SocialPsyc #PolPsych

For #PolPsych folks: For my political psychology graduate class this semester I would like my students to write peer reviews of current political psychology working papers. Please get in touch if you're willing to share a working paper that you'd like some additional eyes on. Thanks in advance.

"On the whole, these results support the social identity approach to system justification highlighting the important role of social identification as a link between an individual's ideological position and social evaluations."

#SocialPsyc #PolPsych PoliSky

Complexities of the Status‐Legitimacy Hypothesis: Authoritarian Personality and System Justification Across Class Introduction The status-legitimacy hypothesis (SLH) posits that low-status individuals are more motivated to justify oppressive social systems than high-status beneficiaries. However, recent researc...

"Much work remains to be done identifying the contours of what constitutes 'the system' and thus what constitutes system justification, as well as when and among who we should expect system justification to occur most."

By @rongbojin.bsky.social & @frankjgonzo.bsky.social

#SocialPsyc #PolPsych

At ISPP @polpsyispp.bsky.social, lab member Fanny Lalot @fannylalot.bsky.social presents her work on futures consciousness and political engagement, with data collected during the French 🇨🇵 and American 🇺🇸 2024 election.
#socialpsychology #polpsych

Outgroup homogeneity, the perception of lower trait variability in the outgroup, is an important psychological mechanism in intergroup relations. This concept is broadly applied to the context of political left-right party camps. A more homogenous perception of the outcamp limits perceived similarities and connections and could thereby foster negative impressions. This study examines whether the outcamp is generally perceived as more homogeneous than the incamp; whether this perception is driving negative affect; and lastly, if it reduces the likelihood of voting for the other camp. Support is found for all three assumptions using cross-sectional data from the full Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) and causal evidence from the German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES). Outgroup homogeneity emerges as a crucial aspect of political intergroup relations. It also provides context to findings on affective polarisation by identifying a form of outgroup dislike that is rooted in group identities, rather than factual disagreement.

Outgroup homogeneity in political intergroup relations

“The perception of homogeneity significantly reduces the likelihood of voting for the other camp”

By @felixgruenewald.bsky.social

Open Access: doi.org/10.1080/0140...

#SocialPsyc PoliSky #PolPsych

Screenshot of paper title which reads "Conspiracy beliefs and democratic backsliding: Longitudinal effects of election conspiracy beliefs on criticism of democracy and support for authoritarianism during political contests". Paper abstract that reads, "There are widespread concerns that conspiracy theories undermine democracies. But do conspiracy beliefs increase criticism of democracy and/or support for authoritarianism? Or are antidemocratic people more likely to endorse conspiracy beliefs? To answer these important questions, we collected longitudinal data during two concurrent democratic elections—the 2020 US Presidential Election (N = 609) and the 2020 General Election in New Zealand (N = 603). Random intercept cross-lagged panel models tested whether conspiracy beliefs affect criticism of democracy in general, as well as support for authoritarianism, and both direct and representative democracy, specifically. There was little evidence that conspiracy beliefs temporally preceded changes in attitudes toward democracy or support for any specific form of government. Instead, people who supported authoritarianism more subsequently endorsed stronger conspiracy beliefs. The results suggested that, in the context of electoral contests (e.g., elections), antidemocratic people are more likely to endorse conspiracy beliefs rather than conspiracy beliefs fostering antidemocratic views."

Over the 2020 US and NZ elections, antidemocratic attitudes preceded conspiracy beliefs, rather than conspiracy beliefs fostering antidemocratic attitudes

by @lindaskitka.bsky.social & many others in @ispp-pops.bsky.social #socpsych #polisky #polpsych

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....

#PolPsych

Paper abstract: Although much is known about why people engage in collective action participation (e.g., politicized identity, group-based anger), little is known about the psychological consequences of such participation. For example, can participation in collective action facilitate attitude moralization (e.g., moralize their attitudes on the topic)? Based on the idea that collective action contexts often involve a strong social movement fighting against an immoral adversary, we propose that participating in collective action facilitates attitude moralization over time. By integrating the moralization and collective action literatures, we hypothesized that participation in collective action moralizes individuals’ attitudes over time because it politicizes their identity, enrages them vis-a-vis the outgroup, and/or empowers them to achieve social change. We tested these hypotheses in a 2-year, five-wave longitudinal study (N = 1,214) in the contentious context of the Chilean student movement. We examined within-person (and between-person) changes over time and consistently found that participation in collective action predicted individual changes in moral conviction over time through politicized identification and group-based anger toward the outgroup. Furthermore, moral conviction predicted participation in collective action over time—an effect consistently explained by politicized identification. These findings are the first to show that (a) participation in collective action moralizes individuals’ attitudes because it politicizes their identity and enrages them vis-a-vis the (immoral) outgroup and that (b) moralization in turn helps to better understand sustained movement participation. Theoretical implications for the literature on moralization and collective action are discussed.

Participation in collective action moralizes people’s attitudes because it politicizes their identity, enrages them, and/or empowers them to achieve social change (by @alleal.bsky.social & co)

psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-...

#polpsych #socpsyc #polisky

Abstract reads Recent scholarship finds that exposure to mass shootings has no effect on Democratic vote shares. While arguably a reasonable proxy for public demand for heightened gun control, this outcome nonetheless reflects myriad issue concerns, with guns being just one issue typically dwarfed in importance by the attention given in electoral campaigns to jobs, the economy, and other social issues. Our research improves the issue-domain correspondence between treatment and outcome by analyzing voting directly on gun policy. We leverage a mass shooting that occurred in Washington state shortly before residents voted on a ballot measure to regulate firearms. Critically, a previous measure on firearms appeared on the ballot in Washington 2 years prior, enabling our analysis to control for pretreatment support for gun control. Across various model specifications, we find that proximity to the shooting was associated with increased support for gun control. We replicate this finding with three additional shootings.

Proximity to a mass shooting (USA data, obviously) increases support for gun control policy [reposted to fix link]

#polpsych

#polisky

www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

Abstract that reads Recent scholarship finds that exposure to mass shootings has no effect on Democratic vote shares. While arguably a reasonable proxy for public demand for heightened gun control, this outcome nonetheless reflects myriad issue concerns, with guns being just one issue typically dwarfed in importance by the attention given in electoral campaigns to jobs, the economy, and other social issues. Our research improves the issue-domain correspondence between treatment and outcome by analyzing voting directly on gun policy. We leverage a mass shooting that occurred in Washington state shortly before residents voted on a ballot measure to regulate firearms. Critically, a previous measure on firearms appeared on the ballot in Washington 2 years prior, enabling our analysis to control for pretreatment support for gun control. Across various model specifications, we find that proximity to the shooting was associated with increased support for gun control. We replicate this finding with three additional shootings.

Proximity to a mass shooting (USA data, obviously) increases support for gun control policy

#polpsych #polisky

www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

Politicians are increasingly subjected to violence, both online and offline. Recent studies highlight a gendered pattern to this violence. But, as societies diversify and minorities increasingly hold political office, we have yet to assess whether members of these groups face disproportionate levels of violence. Our research investigates levels and types of violence against immigrant background politicians in Sweden, where over one-third is either foreign-born or has a foreign-born parent, using a unique three-wave survey () on Swedish elected officials. Across every form of violence examined, politicians with immigrant backgrounds report experiencing significantly more physical and psychological violence than their counterparts. These experiences are not without political consequence: immigrant background politicians, and among them especially women, are significantly more likely than their counterparts to consider exiting politics due to harassment. Together, these findings suggest that violence may be driving this already underrepresented group of immigrant background politicians out of office.

Swedish politicians with immigrant backgrounds report experiencing more physical & psychological violence than their counterparts (by @sandrahkansson.bsky.social & @nazita.bsky.social)

#polpsych #polisky #prejudice

www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

Abstract that reads The main theories explaining electoral backlash against immigration focus on citizens’ cultural, economic, and security concerns. We test these predictions in Switzerland, which opened its labor market to neighboring countries in the 2000s. Employing a difference-in-differences design, we document a substantial rise in immigrant workers in Swiss border municipalities after the border opened. This was accompanied by a 6-percentage-point (95% confidence interval 2–10) increase in support for anti-immigrant parties, equivalent to a 32% rise at the mean. However, we find no adverse effects on citizens’ employment, wages, or subjective perceptions of economic, cultural, or security threats. Instead, we describe how far-right parties introduced novel narratives related to overcrowding to advance hostility toward immigrants. We provide evidence that this rhetoric targeted border municipalities, where it had the greatest impact on voters susceptible to political persuasion. Together, these findings suggest that elites can play a role in driving anti-immigrant votes.

The rise in immigrant workers in Swiss border municipalities increased support for anti-immigrant parties despite the fact that the rise did not harm citizens' employment or perceptions of threat

#polisky #prejudice #polpsych #socpsych

www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

Abstract that reads, Why do people spread false misinformation online? Previous studies have linked affective polar- ization with misinformation sharing and belief. Contrary to these largely observational findings, however, we show that experimentally improving people’s feelings about opposing partisans (ver- sus members of their own party) has no measurable effect on people’s intentions to share true news, false news, or the difference between them, known as discernment. By contrast, we find evidence that a reminder of accuracy can modestly improve truth discernment among people who report sharing political news. These results suggest the need for a reexamination of the role of affective polarization in the dissemination of misinformation online.

Experimentally improving people’s feelings about opposing partisans does not improve truth discernment of news

An accuracy prompt did a bit better, especially for people low in need for chaos

bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.dartmo...

#polisky #polpsych #socpsych

People see AI responses that align with their political identity to be more credible

Authors suggest that this increases their trust in AI in other consequential domains (e.g., loan approval), but I didn't see any direct eft supporting this

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

#polpsych #polisky

Abstract of a paper that reads What explains the gender gap in support for the protection and advancement of women's rights? We argue that because boys receive less and more delayed information outside the home about gender inequality than girls, the cues boys receive inside the home play an outsized role in their adult attitudes about women's rights. Using a large national survey, we demonstrate that men's attitudes toward women's rights are, in fact, more heavily influenced by the perceived attitudinal norms within their family than are women's. Through a follow-up survey experiment with a national sample of U.S. teenagers, we explore this further and illustrate that one-time statements from a single family member shift support for women's rights among young men, but not young women. Importantly, statements from other authority figures do not impact attitudes. Our findings highlight the gendered manner in which familial socialization shapes the gendered attitudes that frame women's lives.

Men's and teenage boy's attitudes toward women's rights are more heavily influenced by their family norms, than are women's and teenage girls' attitudes

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....

#polisky #polpsych #socpsych

Text from the linked website. The text reads, How to Nominate: Nominees must be current ISPP members and within 10 years of having received their PhD. All nominations must include the following: An argument as to why he/she deserves the award and a CV of the nominee. To complete a nomination, simply send these materials to the Committee Chair by the deadline. The award recipient will be strongly encouraged to attend the Annual Meeting and Awards Reception. 2025 Award Committee: Chair: Mark Brandt (Michigan State University) Email Committee: Lene Aaroe (Aarhus University), Angel Saavedra Cisneros (Bowdoin College) THE NOMINATION PROCESS FOR 2025 NOW OPEN. The deadline for nominations is 15 January 2025. Winners will be notified by early April 2025.

I'm chairing the ISPP award committee for the Jim Sidanius Early Career Award

The deadline for nominations is 15 January 2025

To nominate someone, simple email me argument as to why they deserve the award and a CV of the nominee

ispp.org/awards/sidan...

#polisky #polpsych #prejudice #socpsych

Abstract that says Affective polarization is a central characteristic of political competition, but high levels are seen as potentially harmful. In this article, we link the study of affective polarization to that of coalition politics, expecting that by signalling the willingness to cooperate in a coalition, political elites can reduce mutual dislike between political camps. We argue, first, that the impact of coalition formation should depend on the information content (‘surprisingness’) of this signal, and, second, that its effect should spill over to parties outside of the coalition. Combining 20 years of monthly voter-level data from Germany with data on national and regional coalitions, we show that coalitions are most likely to reduce affective distance when participating parties are ideologically distant and when the signals are still recent. Moreover, coalitions have a system-wide impact beyond the specific parties involved. We discuss the implications for the role of political elites in shaping affective polarization.

Party coalitions may reduce affective distance when the parties are ideologically distant and when the coalition is still recent.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....

#polisky #polpsych

Abstract that reads How different racial minorities experience racism differently remains underexplored in existing research. Here, we show that Asian and Black people are often dehumanized differently. Twelve studies spotlight a racial asymmetry in dehumanization using a wide array of methods (experimental, archival, and computational) and data sources (online samples, word embeddings, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data): Whereas Black people are more often subjected to animalistic dehumanization, Asian people are predominantly subjected to mechanistic dehumanization. We demonstrate this asymmetry from the vantage point of victims (Studies 1a and 1b) and perpetrators (Studies 2a–2d). We further document the prevalence of this asymmetry across diverse domains, from everyday language (Study 3) to perceptions in the realms of romantic relationships (Study 4a), crime rates (Study 4b), and business skills (Study 4c). Finally, we demonstrate the asymmetry’s real-world consequences in labor market segregation (Studies 5 and 6). Our findings shed light on the distinct experiences of racism encountered by different racial groups and, more critically, introduce a framework that unifies and integrates scattered empirical observations on perceptions of Asian people.

Asian people and Black people can both face dehumanization in the US, but the type differs: Asian = machine, Black = animal

osf.io/preprints/ps...
psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-...

#prejudice #socpsych #polpsych #psyscisky

Abstract that reads Psychological inoculation is a promising and potentially scalable approach to counter misinformation. The goal of inoculation is to teach people to recognize manipulation techniques, such as emotional language, commonly found in misinformation online. While there is substantial evidence that inoculation increases technique recognition when directly assessed, it is not clear if this effect transfers to spontaneous detection of techniques and disengagement with the associated content in real-life contexts. In particular, emotional appeals are abundant on social media and known drivers of attention and engagement. Therefore, we examined the effects of emotional language and emotional manipulation inoculation on attention and engagement in a simulated social media feed environment. Through five pre-registered studies, we found that inoculation only decreased engagement with emotionally presented content when we solely presented synthetic content relevant to the task of identifying emotional manipulation. Any addition of real tweets or even synthetic tweets containing other manipulation techniques (e.g., ad hominem attacks) into the feed appeared to nullify the effect. Our results highlight the importance of assessing misinformation interventions in ecologically-valid contexts to estimate real-world effects.

Figure showing regression coefficients of key interaction tests. International are not significant, in general. But there are some hints for those representing synthetic posts

Psychological inoculation against misinformation does not appear to transfer to real posts or synthetic posts using other misinformation techniques

osf.io/preprints/ps...

#polisky #polpsych #socpsych #misinformation

And here's a list of psychology-related starter packs including experts in fields such as:

#SocialPsyc

#CogPsyc

#DevPsyc

#PolPsych

Vision Science

Culture & Evolution

#MentalHealth

Body-brain interactions

Gender research

Relationship science

#Autism

Click here and scroll up...

System Justification Theory (SJT) is a thriving field of research, wherein the primary questions revolve around why individuals and groups are motivated to see the systems they depend on as just, fair, and legitimate. This article seeks to answer how accurate the postulates of SJT are when compared to competing self-interest claims of Social Identity and Social Dominance Theory. We addressed the ongoing debates among proponents of each theory by identifying who, when, and why individuals decide to system-justify. We used data comprised of 24,009 participants nested within 42 countries. Multilevel models largely supported the competing claims of Social Dominance and Social Identity Theories over SJT. The most robust findings were: (1) greater objective SES was associated with greater system justification; (2) the consistent positive relationship between subjective SES and system justification was partially mediated by life satisfaction; and (3) both ends of the political spectrum were w

New cross-cultural study (N = 24,009; 42 countries) finds more support for social identity theory and social dominance theory than for system justification theory.

By @evanavaldes.bsky.social, @matthewmatix.bsky.social et al.

www.researchgate.net/publication/...

#SocialPsyc PoliSky #PolPsych 🧪

We examined whether women’s support for gender-based pay inequality (i.e., system justification) might be explained by hope. In particular, we considered whether such hope is likely prompted by positive temporal comparisons: It is entirely possible (even if previously untested) that the more women believe that their outcomes are getting better relative to what it had been at some point in the past, the greater their optimism about a better gender-based outcome could be, prompting women to support the systems that permitted such advancements. These central propositions were derived from the social identity model of systems attitude (SIMSA) and were corroborated in a correlational study involving 611 female healthcare professionals (Study 1). Study 2 (213 Italian- and 79 Spanish-women) offered a conceptual replication and extension of the evidence from Study 1: It showed that inducing positive temporal contrasts caused women’s hope for a better gender-based outcome in the future to incre

A hope explanation of system justification

The more women believe that their outcomes are getting better in a status system, the more they support that system.

doi.org/10.1007/s121...

#SocialPsyc #PolPsych 🧪